Date of filing: 28/02/2020

Date of Judgment: 30/03/2023

Mrs. Ashoka Guha Roy (Bera), Hon’ble Member

            This complaint is filed by the Complainant namely (1) Babli Banik & (2) Prova Banik under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, against opposite party namely Teachers’ Welfare Credit & Holding Ltd. Being represented by Sri Swapan Ghosh the Managing Director, alleging deficiency in service on its part.

            Case of the Complainants in short is that complainants be relations daughter and mother and OP through its Managing Director, introduced himself as Swapan Ghosh is a non-banking institution and induced the Complainants to keep fixed deposit at their institution with the assurance that they would return back the matured value on due date. So, Complainants deposited with the opposite party a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 04.06.2012 for 66 months which has been matured on 04.12.2017 along with interest @ 12.5% having maturity value of Rs.2,00,000/- and another investment amounting to Rs. 70,000/- was deposited in 26.12.2012 and the said amount matured on 26.6.2018 and the amount payable of said fixed deposit on maturity is Rs. 1,40,000/- only. On maturity of the aforesaid sum Complainants requested the opposite party several times but opposite parties did not return back the matured value of the deposited amount to the Complainant. So they lodged an FIR dtd. 04.12.2019 against the Teachers Welfare Credit and Holding Ltd with the Jadavpur Police Station. Thereafter the complainants also lodged complaint with the Consumer Affairs and Fair Business Practices dtd. 9.12.2019 but that too yielded result. Hence finding no other alternative the present case has been filed by the Complainants praying for directing the opposite party to return back the matured value of the deposit to the Complainants, to pay interest on the amount from the date of the maturity, to pay Compensation for mental agony and harassment and for litigation cost.

            On perusal of the record, it appears that in spite of service of notice, as no step was taken by the opposite party, hence the case proceeded ex-parte against Opposite party.

            Complainants have filed the certificate issued by the opposite party and has annexed with the complaint copy of certificate of Registration issued by R.B.I. dt.19.01.1991 and copy of Aadhar Card, Copy of FIR lodged with Jadavpur P.S. , Copy of complaint filed before the Department of Consumer Affairs and Fair Business Practices.

            So, the only point requires determination is whether the Complainants are entitled to the relief as prayed for.

Decision with reason

Complainants have jointly claimed that they deposited a total sum of Rs.1,70,000/- with the opposite parties and on receiving the said sum, certificates were issued. On perusal of the certificates or the receipt filed by the Complainants, it appears that amount were deposited on 04.06.2012 & 26.12.2011 and it was to be matured on 04.12.2017 & 26.06.2018 respectively. Amount payable on maturity has been stated as Rs.3,40,000/-. Complainants have claimed that in spite of repeated request and visit to the office of the OP, they have not paid the matured sum. The certificate or the receipt bearing No. F/23811/13/66 & F/20383/12/66 repectively filed by the Complainant establishes his claim especially as no contrary  material is forthcoming before this Commission. So, as there has been unfair trade practice, Complainants are entitled to the reliefs as prayed

Hence

            Ordered

CC/93/2020 is allowed ex-parte. Opposite parties are directed to pay the matured sum of Rs.3,40,000/- to the Complainant within two months from the date of this order along with interest @ 10% on the said sum from the date of maturity to till this date, in default the entire sum shall carry interest @ 9% till realisation. Opposite parties are further directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- within the aforementioned period of two months.